I realise it’s difficult to describe sarcasm in text form without pointing it out - which in turn derides the fundamental precept of sarcasm in so doing, and I recall my university lecturer lamenting that it was the “lowest form of humour” to which I answered, “You are Sooooo right,” but there you have it. Apologies for the brief digression.
Nokia just announced that “Nokia Pure” is their new standard font to be used throughout their mobile product lines. I’m trying to understand this but I just don’t get how a font which is so remarkably similar to most other fonts can possibly be necessary or value adding. The idea that a font can be a differentiator of sorts can work as identification of a brand. Nokia Sans was iconic as it was all they used in their devices for a long time. However if I saw Nokia Sans on a poster my mind wouldn’t leap to “hey, that’s Nokia’s font it must be a Nokia related poster” but rather - oh, it spelled the word “xxx, that’s nice”. I am not a font nut, font lover, font-ist? Nor are the majority of the worlds population. The majority of the population simply don’t care. If they can read it, then it works.
It’s clear that Nokia want to make their new phones different from everyone elses but still use Windows Phone 7 as their core and that’s fine. I can’t help but think there were better ways to expend their time and resources on more significant and more impactful advancements for their platform.